bup vs UrBackup
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
bup
Efficient backup system based on the git packfile format
VS
UrBackup
Client-server backup for files and disk images
| Feature | bup | UrBackup |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | LGPL-2.1 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | C |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | binary | docker, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 7,337 | ★ 890 |
| First released | 2010 | 2011 |
| Replaces | Time Machine | Carbonite |
Why pick each one
Choose bup if…
- Released under the LGPL-2.1 license
- Mature project with 7.3k GitHub stars
- Written in Python
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Choose UrBackup if…
- Good for backing up many PCs
- Image backup support
- Central management
Frequently asked questions
Is bup or UrBackup better?
Neither is universally better. bup has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are bup and UrBackup free and open-source?
Yes. bup is licensed under LGPL-2.1 and UrBackup under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run bup and UrBackup with Docker?
bup: check the project docs for container support. UrBackup: yes.